Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the Principle of Gravitational Expansion is not the actual physical mechanics of the idea itself but the negative psychological reaction that people have when first exposed to the idea. Even though the idea is a simple and even obvious explanation of gravity, it is never even considered as an option when gravitational theories are discussed.
It has always been a great mystery to me why Einstein never even appears to have considered the possibility of gravitational expansion before establishing the principle of equivalence as the foundation of General Relativity. To me it seems impossible that any scientifically minded person could even arrive at the principle of equivalence without first considering gravitational expansion and then offering some reason for rejecting it. This is like failing to look both ways before crossing a busy street. It is almost like there is a powerful but unconscious taboo deeply buried at the foundation of human psychology that prevents the idea of gravitational expansion from ever rising spontaneously into the conscious layers of the mind.
When he was working on his theories, Einstein was highly uneducated by any of the educational standards of today. He didn’t know about neutrons, neutrinos, antimatter, cosmic rays, dark energy, Compton scattering, the weak or strong interactions, galaxies, quasars, gamma ray bursts, pulsars, or even the 2.7°CBR. Even so, he wasn’t stupid and must have spent at least some of his time thinking about gravity. How could he have missed the principle of gravitational expansion? It would seem that simple logic would demand that gravitational expansion at least be considered by anyone contemplating an idea as peculiar as the Equivalence Principle. The first time I learned about Equivalence over forty years ago, gravitational expansion got stuck in my head and I haven’t been able to get it out since.
I know from personal experience the great power of the negativity that accompanies this idea. Many times during the past forty years that I have devoted to developing and promoting the Principle of Gravitational Expansion, I have experienced very strong feelings welling up from deep in my own psyche that the idea couldn’t possibly be true, even though I could never find any physical evidence that could even be remotely interpreted in such a way as to cast doubt on it.
Also, I have never ceased to be amazed by the immediate negative reaction of both scientists and laymen when the idea of gravitational expansion is explained to them for the first time. Disbelief is far too mild a term to describe their immediate and perhaps even involuntary hostility to the suggestion that their bodies, as well as the earth itself might be constantly increasing in size. Logical arguments and physical evidence are never used to counter the idea. To many the idea is so distasteful and obviously wrong that the issue becomes one of morality as much as intellect. My credibility immediately evaporates when they realize that I am serious and therefore must have some kind of serious mental defect to attempt to promote an idea. Even people without any scientific training can immediately identify gravitational expansion as being totally false. The subject is not even open for discussion because everyone seems to know instinctively that matter can’t possible expand. This seems to be an intrinsic psychological reaction against change that almost no one is able to overcome.
I am told that I fail to realize that the real beauty of the Equivalence Principle is that it allows us to transcend the limitations of the physical measurement process and to establish effects beyond their reach. They say something like, “The Equivalence Principle is true because it predicts that a false upward acceleration will be measured at the earth’s surface that is exactly equal and opposite to the true acceleration of a falling body that is otherwise undetectable in any way. Therefore we know this measured acceleration to be truly false and this undetectable acceleration to be truly real because they are predicted to be so by the equivalence principle that is thus proven to be true.” Its hard to argue with someone when you can’t even agree on the distinction between up and down.
Since no experiment has ever yet been able to falsify it, we can accept or at least consider as fact that the upward gravitational acceleration of the earth’s surface, as measured by an accelerometer, produces real motion through absolute inertial space. If experimental evidence could ever be found to invalidate the principle of gravitational expansion, it would also serve as a falsification of the Equivalence Principle, because the principle of gravitational expansion, in effect, demands that the Equivalence Principle be both absolute and unnecessary and must be replaced by the principle of Absolute Motion.
Principle of Absolute Motion
Principle of Equivalence (Einstein)
“In an arbitrary gravitational field no local experiment can distinguish a freelyfalling non-rotating system (non-inertial) from a uniformly moving system in the absence of a gravitational field.”
Principle of Equivalence is replaced by Principle of Absolute Motion
Principle of Absolute Motion
All acceleration measured by an accelerometer produces real change in motion, either acceleration or deceleration, relative to photon rest. All change in motion relative to photon rest, either acceleration or deceleration, is registered by an accelerometer. Deceleration is distinguished from acceleration by the increasing rate of an atomic clock undergoing deceleration and the slowing rate of a clock undergoing acceleration.